Hip FracturesNCT07419789
Precision Care for Older Persons
A study testing Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care Model in people with Hip Fractures, run by Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at 2 sites in Taiwan.
Trial summary
This study aims to 1) develop an Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care Model that is able to predict patient outcomes; and 2) evaluate the effectiveness of this model by assessing improvements in care and recovery for older individuals post hip fracture. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 60 to 120 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Hip Fractures
- What is being tested?
- Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care Model
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 218 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesTaiwan
- Study dates
- 1 Aug 2026to 31 Dec 2030
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 60 to 120 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- ≥ 60 years old,
- had been transferred from the emergency department to the hospital due to a unilateral hip fracture,
- repair of the hip fracture involved either hip arthroplasty or internal fixation, 4) their primary place of residence was northern Taiwan
Who cannot join
- severity of cognitive impairment (a CMMSE score of < 10),
- known to be terminally ill,
- has no primary family caregiver,
- residing in an institutional care facility
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Jersey Liang, PhD contact
Taiwan2 sites
Tuchen Branch Chang Gung Hospital
New Taipei City, Taiwan, 106
Yea-Ing Shyu, 0978697460, yeaing@mail.cgu.edu.tw
Chen-June Seak, MS, MD, julianseak@hotmail.com
Linkuo Chang Gung Memorial Hospital
Taoyuan, Taiwan, 33302
Yea-Ing Shyu, PhD, 0978697460, yeaing@mail.cgu.edu.tw
Yu-Chih Lin, Master, b101092127@tmu.edu.tw
About this study
Official title: Precision Care for Older Persons With Hip Fractures
This study aims to 1) develop an Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care Model that is able to predict patient outcomes; and 2) evaluate the effectiveness of this model by assessing improvements in care and recovery for older individuals post hip fracture.
Read the detailed description
The APC Smart Home Care Model will be developed as follows: a) incorporate a prediction system based on ML data available from our prior studies; b) incorporate an enhanced feedback system using results from the prediction system, which will allow family caregivers to receive timely alerts and facilitate interactions between home care nurses and caregivers; and c) the APC prediction system will be further developed to allow for implementation of targeted home nursing interventions that can be individualized to meet the specific needs of each family caregiver and the person recovering from hip fracture. A mixed-methods approach will be employed to examine the effectiveness of the system, using a combination of quantitative and qualitative data.
- Conditions
- Hip Fractures
- Being tested
- Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care Model
- Keywords
- hip fracture, family caregiving, smart care, person-centered care, precision care
- Medical subject headings
- Hip Fractures
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care ModelBehavioural
Enhanced Smart Care Model (SCM) that incorporates precise predictions of adverse outcomes and improvements in the real-time feedback system for caregivers and person-center home-based nursing.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care Model | Experimental | Smart cloth assisted Home Care will be tailored to the needs of the individual with hip fracture and promptly administered. Continuous monitoring of clinical data will identify deviations from a patient's daily routine, which will guide ML-predictions of adverse outcomes and facilitate proactive health interventions by home nurses. Real-time feedback to caregivers will be provided via an app, providing timely alerts and ensuring swift and appropriate action. Receives: Behavioral: Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care Model |
| Usual care | No intervention | Routine hospital care following hip fracture surgery without smart cloth care |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Fall Incidents.
number of falls
Measured: 1st month following discharge
Fall Incidents.
number of falls
Measured: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Fall insidents
number of falls
Measured: 6th month following hospital discharge
Fall incidents
Number of falls
Measured: 12th month following hospital discharge
Fall incidents
Number of falls
Measured: 18th month following hospital discharge
Fall incidents
Number of falls
Measured: 24th month following hospital discharge
range of motion
The clinical outcomes to be assessed include range of motion (ROM) in the affected limb in degree
Measured: 1st month following hospital discharge
Muscle strength of affected limb
maximum amount of force that a muscle can generate during a single contraction. The unit is weights.
Measured: 1st month following hosptial discharge
Visual analog of Pain score
patient self-report that collected by assessor. Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating more pain.
Measured: 1st month following hospital discharge
Barthel Index
assessor measures functional indepdencen in activities of daily living (ADLs) of the patient, score range 0-100, higher score indicate more independent.
Measured: 1st month following discharge
Lawton IADL scale
Instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) collected by assessor. Score rage from 0 tto 8, with 8 indicating more independent function.
Measured: 1st month following discharge
Caregiver balance
The perception of caregivers regarding their ability to manage conflicting caregiving demands. Score range 1-3, with higher score indicating more balance.
Measured: 1st following hospital discharge
Caregiver balance
The perception of caregivers regarding their ability to manage conflicting caregiving demands. Score range 1-3, with higher score indicating more balance.
Measured: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Caregiver Balance
The perception of caregivers regarding their ability to manage conflicting caregiving demands. Score range 1-3, with higher score indicating more balance.
Measured: 6th month following hospital discharge
Caregiver Balance
The perception of caregivers regarding their ability to manage conflicting caregiving demands. Score range 1-3, with higher score indicating more balance.
Measured: 12th month following hospital discharge
Caregiver Balance
The perception of caregivers regarding their ability to manage conflicting caregiving demands. Score range 1-3, with higher score indicating more balance.
Measured: 18th month following hospital discharge
Caregiver Balance
The perception of caregivers regarding their ability to manage conflicting caregiving demands. Score range 1-3, with higher score indicating more balance.
Measured: 24 month following hospital discharge
Caregiver preparedness
Caregiver readiness to handle caregiving responsibilities and associated stresses. Score range 0-32, with higher score indicating more prepared.
Measured: 1st month following hospital discharge
Caregiver preparedness
Caregiver readiness to handle caregiving responsibilities and associated stresses. Score range 0-32, with higher score indicating more prepared.
Measured: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Caregiver Preparedness
Caregiver readiness to handle caregiving responsibilities and associated stresses. Score range 0-32, with higher score indicating more prepared.
Measured: 6th month following hospital discharge
Caregiver Preparedness
Caregiver readiness to handle caregiving responsibilities and associated stresses. Score range 0-32, with higher score indicating more prepared.
Measured: 12 month following hospital discharge
Caregiver preparedness
Caregiver readiness to handle caregiving responsibilities and associated stresses. Score range 0-32, with higher score indicating more prepared.
Measured: 18th month following hospital discharge
range of motion
The clinical outcomes to be assessed include range of motion (ROM) in the affected limb in degree
Measured: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Caregiver Preparedness
Caregiver readiness to handle caregiving responsibilities and associated stresses. Score range 0-32, with higher score indicating more prepared.
Measured: 24th month following hospital discharge
range of motion
The clinical outcomes to be assessed include range of motion (ROM) in the affected limb in degree
Measured: 6th month following hospital discharge
range of motion
The clinical outcomes to be assessed include range of motion (ROM) in the affected limb in degree
Measured: 12th month following hospital discharge
range of motion
The clinical outcomes to be assessed include range of motion (ROM) in the affected limb in degree
Measured: 18th month following hospital discharge
range of motion
The clinical outcomes to be assessed include range of motion (ROM) in the affected limb in degree
Measured: 24th month following hospital discharge
Muscle strength of affected limb
maximum amount of force that a muscle can generate during a single contraction. The unit is weights.
Measured: 3rd month following hosptial discharge
Muscle strength of affected limb
maximum amount of force that a muscle can generate during a single contraction. The unit is weights.
Measured: 6th month following hosptial discharge
Muscle strength of affected limb
maximum amount of force that a muscle can generate during a single contraction. The unit is weights.
Measured: 12th month following hosptial discharge
Muscle strength of affected limb
maximum amount of force that a muscle can generate during a single contraction. The unit is weights.
Measured: 18th month following hosptial discharge
Muscle strength of affected limb
maximum amount of force that a muscle can generate during a single contraction. The unit is weights.
Measured: 24th month following hosptial discharge
Visual analog of Pain score
patient self-report that collected by assessor. Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating more pain.
Measured: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Visual analog of Pain score
patient self-report that collected by assessor. Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating more pain.
Measured: 6th month following hospital discharge
Visual analog of Pain score
patient self-report that collected by assessor. Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating more pain.
Measured: 12th month following hospital discharge
Visual analog of Pain score
patient self-report that collected by assessor. Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating more pain.
Measured: 18th month following hospital discharge
Visual analog of Pain score
patient self-report that collected by assessor. Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating more pain.
Measured: 24th month following hospital discharge
Barthel Index
assessor measures functional indepdencen in activities of daily living (ADLs) of the patient, score range 0-100, higher score indicate more independent.
Measured: 3rd month following discharge
Barthel Index
assessor measures functional indepdencen in activities of daily living (ADLs) of the patient, score range 0-100, higher score indicate more independent.
Measured: 6th month following discharge
Barthel Index
assessor measures functional indepdencen in activities of daily living (ADLs) of the patient, score range 0-100, higher score indicate more independent.
Measured: 12th month following discharge
Barthel Index
assessor measures functional indepdencen in activities of daily living (ADLs) of the patient, score range 0-100, higher score indicate more independent.
Measured: 18 month following discharge
Barthel Index
assessor measures functional indepdencen in activities of daily living (ADLs) of the patient, score range 0-100, higher score indicate more independent.
Measured: 24th month following discharge
Lawton IADL scale
Instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) collected by assessor. Score rage from 0 tto 8, with 8 indicating more independent function.
Measured: 3rd month following discharge
Lawton IADL scale
Instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) collected by assessor. Score rage from 0 tto 8, with 8 indicating more independent function.
Measured: 6th month following discharge
Lawton IADL scale
Instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) collected by assessor. Score rage from 0 tto 8, with 8 indicating more independent function.
Measured: 12 month following discharge
Lawton IADL scale
Instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) collected by assessor. Score rage from 0 tto 8, with 8 indicating more independent function.
Measured: 18 month following discharge
Lawton IADL scale
Instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) collected by assessor. Score rage from 0 tto 8, with 8 indicating more independent function.
Measured: 24 month following discharge
Secondary outcomes (36)
number of visits to emergency department
collected by assessor asking family members
Measured: 1st month following hospital discharge
number of hospital readmission
collected by assessor by asking family members
Measured: 1st month following hospital discharge
Cognitive function
Cognitive function following hip-fracture surgery will be assessed using the Taiwan version of the Mini Mental State Examination. Score ranges 0-30, with higher score indicating better cognitive function.
Measured: 1st month following hospital discharge
Cognitive function
Cognitive function following hip-fracture surgery will be assessed using the Taiwan version of the Mini Mental State Examination. Score ranges 0-30, with higher score indicating better cognitive function.
Measured: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Cognitive function
Cognitive function following hip-fracture surgery will be assessed using the Taiwan version of the Mini Mental State Examination. Score ranges 0-30, with higher score indicating better cognitive function.
Measured: 6th month following hospital discharge
Cognitive function
Cognitive function following hip-fracture surgery will be assessed using the Taiwan version of the Mini Mental State Examination. Score ranges 0-30, with higher score indicating better cognitive function.
Measured: 12th month following hospital discharge
Cognitive function
Cognitive function following hip-fracture surgery will be assessed using the Taiwan version of the Mini Mental State Examination. Score ranges 0-30, with higher score indicating better cognitive function.
Measured: 18th month following hospital discharge
Cognitive function
Cognitive function following hip-fracture surgery will be assessed using the Taiwan version of the Mini Mental State Examination. Score ranges 0-30, with higher score indicating better cognitive function.
Measured: 24th month following hospital discharge
Depressive symptoms
Patients' depressive symptoms will be evaluated using the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale, short form (GDS-SF). Score range 0-15, with higher score indicating higher depressive symptoms.
Measured: 1st month following hospital discharge
Depressive symptoms
Patients' depressive symptoms will be evaluated using the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale, short form (GDS-SF). Score range 0-15, with higher score indicating higher depressive symptoms.
Measured: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Depressive symptoms
Patients' depressive symptoms will be evaluated using the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale, short form (GDS-SF). Score range 0-15, with higher score indicating higher depressive symptoms.
Measured: 6th month following hospital discharge
Depressive symptoms
Patients' depressive symptoms will be evaluated using the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale, short form (GDS-SF). Score range 0-15, with higher score indicating higher depressive symptoms.
Measured: 12th month following hospital discharge
Depressive symptoms
Patients' depressive symptoms will be evaluated using the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale, short form (GDS-SF). Score range 0-15, with higher score indicating higher depressive symptoms.
Measured: 18th month following hospital discharge
Depressive symptoms
Patients' depressive symptoms will be evaluated using the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale, short form (GDS-SF). Score range 0-15, with higher score indicating higher depressive symptoms.
Measured: 24th month following hospital discharge
Nutritional Status
The 18-item Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). Score range 0-30, with higher score indicating better nutritioanl status.
Measured: 1st month following hospital discharge
Nutritional Status
The 18-item Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). Score range 0-30, with higher score indicating better nutritioanl status.
Measured: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Nutritional Status
The 18-item Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). Score range 0-30, with higher score indicating better nutritioanl status.
Measured: 6th month following hospital discharge
Nutritional Status
The 18-item Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). Score range 0-30, with higher score indicating better nutritioanl status.
Measured: 12th month following hospital discharge
Nutritional Status
The 18-item Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). Score range 0-30, with higher score indicating better nutritioanl status.
Measured: 18th month following hospital discharge
Nutritional Status
The 18-item Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA). Score range 0-30, with higher score indicating better nutritioanl status.
Measured: 24th month following hospital discharge
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)
Taiwan version of the 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36). Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating better health outcomes.
Measured: 1st month following hospital discharge
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)
Taiwan version of the 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36). Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating better health outcomes.
Measured: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)
Taiwan version of the 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36). Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating better health outcomes.
Measured: 6th month following hospital discharge
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)
Taiwan version of the 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36). Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating better health outcomes.
Measured: 12th month following hospital discharge
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)
Taiwan version of the 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36). Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating better health outcomes.
Measured: 18th month following hospital discharge
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)
Taiwan version of the 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36). Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating better health outcomes.
Measured: 24th month following hospital discharge
number of visits to emergency department
collected by assessor asking family members
Measured: 3rd month following hospital discharge
number of visits to emergency department
collected by assessor asking family members
Measured: 6th month following hospital discharge
number of visits to emergency department
collected by assessor asking family members
Measured: 12th month following hospital discharge
number of visits to emergency department
collected by assessor asking family members
Measured: 18th month following hospital discharge
number of visits to emergency department
collected by assessor asking family members
Measured: 24th month following hospital discharge
number of hospital readmission
collected by assessor by asking family members
Measured: 3rd month following hospital discharge
number of hospital readmission
collected by assessor by asking family members
Measured: 6th month following hospital discharge
number of hospital readmission
collected by assessor by asking family members
Measured: 12 month following hospital discharge
number of hospital readmission
collected by assessor by asking family members
Measured: 18th month following hospital discharge
number of hospital readmission
collected by assessor by asking family members
Measured: 24 month following hospital discharge
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted19 Feb 2026
- Study start1 Aug 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion31 Dec 2030 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Dec 2030 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Hip FracturesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 218 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Chang Gung Memorial Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Chang Gung University, National Health Research Institutes, Taiwan
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Yea-Ing Shyu, Principal investigator, Chang Gung University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07419789
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- NHRI-EX115-11506PI
- Status last verified
- Oct 2025
- First submitted
- 3 Feb 2026
- Last updated
- 19 Feb 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 19 Feb 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Precision Care for Older Persons With Hip Fractures
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07419789
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- NHRI-EX115-11506PI
- Conditions
- Hip Fractures
- Keywords
- hip fracture, family caregiving, smart care, person-centered care, precision care
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 218 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Chang Gung Memorial HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Chang Gung University, National Health Research Institutes, Taiwan
- Study start
- 1 Aug 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2030 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2030 (estimated)
- First posted
- 19 Feb 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study aims to 1) develop an Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care Model that is able to predict patient outcomes; and 2) evaluate the effectiveness of this model by assessing improvements in care and recovery for older individuals post hip fracture.
Detailed description
The APC Smart Home Care Model will be developed as follows: a) incorporate a prediction system based on ML data available from our prior studies; b) incorporate an enhanced feedback system using results from the prediction system, which will allow family caregivers to receive timely alerts and facilitate interactions between home care nurses and caregivers; and c) the APC prediction system will be further developed to allow for implementation of targeted home nursing interventions that can be individualized to meet the specific needs of each family caregiver and the person recovering from hip fracture. A mixed-methods approach will be employed to examine the effectiveness of the system, using a combination of quantitative and qualitative data.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care Model | Experimental | Behavioral: Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care ModelSmart cloth assisted Home Care will be tailored to the needs of the individual with hip fracture and promptly administered. Continuous monitoring of clinical data will identify deviations from a patient's daily routine, which will guide ML-predictions of adverse outcomes and facilitate proactive health interventions by home nurses. Real-time feedback to caregivers will be provided via an app, providing timely alerts and ensuring swift and appropriate action. |
| Usual care | No intervention | –Routine hospital care following hip fracture surgery without smart cloth care |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 60 to 120 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- ≥ 60 years old,
- had been transferred from the emergency department to the hospital due to a unilateral hip fracture,
- repair of the hip fracture involved either hip arthroplasty or internal fixation, 4) their primary place of residence was northern Taiwan
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- severity of cognitive impairment (a CMMSE score of < 10),
- known to be terminally ill,
- has no primary family caregiver,
- residing in an institutional care facility
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care ModelEnhanced Smart Care Model (SCM) that incorporates precise predictions of adverse outcomes and improvements in the real-time feedback system for caregivers and person-center home-based nursing. | Behavioural | Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care Model |
Primary outcome
Fall Incidents.
Time frame: 1st month following discharge
number of falls
Fall Incidents.
Time frame: 3rd month following hospital discharge
number of falls
Fall insidents
Time frame: 6th month following hospital discharge
number of falls
Fall incidents
Time frame: 12th month following hospital discharge
Number of falls
Fall incidents
Time frame: 18th month following hospital discharge
Number of falls
Fall incidents
Time frame: 24th month following hospital discharge
Number of falls
range of motion
Time frame: 1st month following hospital discharge
The clinical outcomes to be assessed include range of motion (ROM) in the affected limb in degree
Muscle strength of affected limb
Time frame: 1st month following hosptial discharge
maximum amount of force that a muscle can generate during a single contraction. The unit is weights.
Visual analog of Pain score
Time frame: 1st month following hospital discharge
patient self-report that collected by assessor. Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating more pain.
Barthel Index
Time frame: 1st month following discharge
assessor measures functional indepdencen in activities of daily living (ADLs) of the patient, score range 0-100, higher score indicate more independent.
Lawton IADL scale
Time frame: 1st month following discharge
Instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) collected by assessor. Score rage from 0 tto 8, with 8 indicating more independent function.
Caregiver balance
Time frame: 1st following hospital discharge
The perception of caregivers regarding their ability to manage conflicting caregiving demands. Score range 1-3, with higher score indicating more balance.
Caregiver balance
Time frame: 3rd month following hospital discharge
The perception of caregivers regarding their ability to manage conflicting caregiving demands. Score range 1-3, with higher score indicating more balance.
Caregiver Balance
Time frame: 6th month following hospital discharge
The perception of caregivers regarding their ability to manage conflicting caregiving demands. Score range 1-3, with higher score indicating more balance.
Caregiver Balance
Time frame: 12th month following hospital discharge
The perception of caregivers regarding their ability to manage conflicting caregiving demands. Score range 1-3, with higher score indicating more balance.
Caregiver Balance
Time frame: 18th month following hospital discharge
The perception of caregivers regarding their ability to manage conflicting caregiving demands. Score range 1-3, with higher score indicating more balance.
Caregiver Balance
Time frame: 24 month following hospital discharge
The perception of caregivers regarding their ability to manage conflicting caregiving demands. Score range 1-3, with higher score indicating more balance.
Caregiver preparedness
Time frame: 1st month following hospital discharge
Caregiver readiness to handle caregiving responsibilities and associated stresses. Score range 0-32, with higher score indicating more prepared.
Caregiver preparedness
Time frame: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Caregiver readiness to handle caregiving responsibilities and associated stresses. Score range 0-32, with higher score indicating more prepared.
Caregiver Preparedness
Time frame: 6th month following hospital discharge
Caregiver readiness to handle caregiving responsibilities and associated stresses. Score range 0-32, with higher score indicating more prepared.
Caregiver Preparedness
Time frame: 12 month following hospital discharge
Caregiver readiness to handle caregiving responsibilities and associated stresses. Score range 0-32, with higher score indicating more prepared.
Caregiver preparedness
Time frame: 18th month following hospital discharge
Caregiver readiness to handle caregiving responsibilities and associated stresses. Score range 0-32, with higher score indicating more prepared.
range of motion
Time frame: 3rd month following hospital discharge
The clinical outcomes to be assessed include range of motion (ROM) in the affected limb in degree
Caregiver Preparedness
Time frame: 24th month following hospital discharge
Caregiver readiness to handle caregiving responsibilities and associated stresses. Score range 0-32, with higher score indicating more prepared.
range of motion
Time frame: 6th month following hospital discharge
The clinical outcomes to be assessed include range of motion (ROM) in the affected limb in degree
range of motion
Time frame: 12th month following hospital discharge
The clinical outcomes to be assessed include range of motion (ROM) in the affected limb in degree
range of motion
Time frame: 18th month following hospital discharge
The clinical outcomes to be assessed include range of motion (ROM) in the affected limb in degree
range of motion
Time frame: 24th month following hospital discharge
The clinical outcomes to be assessed include range of motion (ROM) in the affected limb in degree
Muscle strength of affected limb
Time frame: 3rd month following hosptial discharge
maximum amount of force that a muscle can generate during a single contraction. The unit is weights.
Muscle strength of affected limb
Time frame: 6th month following hosptial discharge
maximum amount of force that a muscle can generate during a single contraction. The unit is weights.
Muscle strength of affected limb
Time frame: 12th month following hosptial discharge
maximum amount of force that a muscle can generate during a single contraction. The unit is weights.
Muscle strength of affected limb
Time frame: 18th month following hosptial discharge
maximum amount of force that a muscle can generate during a single contraction. The unit is weights.
Muscle strength of affected limb
Time frame: 24th month following hosptial discharge
maximum amount of force that a muscle can generate during a single contraction. The unit is weights.
Visual analog of Pain score
Time frame: 3rd month following hospital discharge
patient self-report that collected by assessor. Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating more pain.
Visual analog of Pain score
Time frame: 6th month following hospital discharge
patient self-report that collected by assessor. Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating more pain.
Visual analog of Pain score
Time frame: 12th month following hospital discharge
patient self-report that collected by assessor. Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating more pain.
Visual analog of Pain score
Time frame: 18th month following hospital discharge
patient self-report that collected by assessor. Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating more pain.
Visual analog of Pain score
Time frame: 24th month following hospital discharge
patient self-report that collected by assessor. Score range 0-100, with higher score indicating more pain.
Barthel Index
Time frame: 3rd month following discharge
assessor measures functional indepdencen in activities of daily living (ADLs) of the patient, score range 0-100, higher score indicate more independent.
Barthel Index
Time frame: 6th month following discharge
assessor measures functional indepdencen in activities of daily living (ADLs) of the patient, score range 0-100, higher score indicate more independent.
Barthel Index
Time frame: 12th month following discharge
assessor measures functional indepdencen in activities of daily living (ADLs) of the patient, score range 0-100, higher score indicate more independent.
Barthel Index
Time frame: 18 month following discharge
assessor measures functional indepdencen in activities of daily living (ADLs) of the patient, score range 0-100, higher score indicate more independent.
Barthel Index
Time frame: 24th month following discharge
assessor measures functional indepdencen in activities of daily living (ADLs) of the patient, score range 0-100, higher score indicate more independent.
Lawton IADL scale
Time frame: 3rd month following discharge
Instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) collected by assessor. Score rage from 0 tto 8, with 8 indicating more independent function.
Lawton IADL scale
Time frame: 6th month following discharge
Instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) collected by assessor. Score rage from 0 tto 8, with 8 indicating more independent function.
Lawton IADL scale
Time frame: 12 month following discharge
Instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) collected by assessor. Score rage from 0 tto 8, with 8 indicating more independent function.
Lawton IADL scale
Time frame: 18 month following discharge
Instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) collected by assessor. Score rage from 0 tto 8, with 8 indicating more independent function.
Lawton IADL scale
Time frame: 24 month following discharge
Instrumental activities of daily living (ADLs) collected by assessor. Score rage from 0 tto 8, with 8 indicating more independent function.
36 secondary outcomes
number of visits to emergency department
Time frame: 1st month following hospital discharge
number of hospital readmission
Time frame: 1st month following hospital discharge
Cognitive function
Time frame: 1st month following hospital discharge
Cognitive function
Time frame: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Cognitive function
Time frame: 6th month following hospital discharge
Cognitive function
Time frame: 12th month following hospital discharge
Cognitive function
Time frame: 18th month following hospital discharge
Cognitive function
Time frame: 24th month following hospital discharge
Depressive symptoms
Time frame: 1st month following hospital discharge
Depressive symptoms
Time frame: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Depressive symptoms
Time frame: 6th month following hospital discharge
Depressive symptoms
Time frame: 12th month following hospital discharge
Depressive symptoms
Time frame: 18th month following hospital discharge
Depressive symptoms
Time frame: 24th month following hospital discharge
Nutritional Status
Time frame: 1st month following hospital discharge
Nutritional Status
Time frame: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Nutritional Status
Time frame: 6th month following hospital discharge
Nutritional Status
Time frame: 12th month following hospital discharge
Nutritional Status
Time frame: 18th month following hospital discharge
Nutritional Status
Time frame: 24th month following hospital discharge
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)
Time frame: 1st month following hospital discharge
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)
Time frame: 3rd month following hospital discharge
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)
Time frame: 6th month following hospital discharge
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)
Time frame: 12th month following hospital discharge
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)
Time frame: 18th month following hospital discharge
Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL)
Time frame: 24th month following hospital discharge
number of visits to emergency department
Time frame: 3rd month following hospital discharge
number of visits to emergency department
Time frame: 6th month following hospital discharge
number of visits to emergency department
Time frame: 12th month following hospital discharge
number of visits to emergency department
Time frame: 18th month following hospital discharge
number of visits to emergency department
Time frame: 24th month following hospital discharge
number of hospital readmission
Time frame: 3rd month following hospital discharge
number of hospital readmission
Time frame: 6th month following hospital discharge
number of hospital readmission
Time frame: 12 month following hospital discharge
number of hospital readmission
Time frame: 18th month following hospital discharge
number of hospital readmission
Time frame: 24 month following hospital discharge
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 19 Feb 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Hip Fractures
Recruiting
Monitored Anesthesia Care and Soft Tissue Infiltration With Local Anesthesia Feasibility Trial
Hip Fracture Surgeries, Intertrochanteric Fracture
Not yet recruitingObservational study
3D-Printed Pelvic Models for Planning Complex Total Hip Arthroplasty
Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip, Acetabular Bone Loss
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Suzetrigine (Journavx) as Multimodal Therapy for Pain Management in Adults Undergoing Surgery for Hip Fracture
Hip Fractures (ICD-10 72.01-72.2), Post Operative Analgesia
RecruitingObservational study
Pelvic and Acetabular Fracture: A Prospective Observational Study
Pelvic Fracture, Acetabular Fracture
RecruitingObservational study
Z1 Hip System: Post-Market Clinical Follow Up Study
Hip Osteoarthritis, Acute Traumatic Fracture of the Femoral Head or Neck
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Jersey Liang, PhD contact
Yea-Ing Shyu principal investigator
Chang Gung University
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Advanced Person-Centered (APC) Smart Home Care Model in people with Hip Fractures, run by Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at 2 sites in Taiwan.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 19 Feb 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in Taiwan. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Yea-Ing Shyu, PhD (+886978697460, yeaing@mail.cgu.edu.tw), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Fall Incidents. (time frame: 1st month following discharge). The study lists 48 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 19 Feb 2026; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 30 Oct 2026.